quote:

ORIGINAL: ZOOMIE1980

quote:

ORIGINAL: Arnir

Or perhaps the other 4993 don't want to get into what is considered to be a fruitless debate. Some of us might be waiting until it appears that the debate might have a purpose.

Of course, if the "silent majority" never speaks up then they will become the "irrelevant majority." I would imagine that if Matrix/2by3 publicly announces their willingness to consider changing the issue, more players will become involved.

That's fair enough. But if you want a say so in a feature, speak up. If you don't until AFTER a decision gets made, you akin to the person who whines about their government representatives but never votes...

quote:

ORIGINAL: Mr.Frag

quote:

The other 4993 are IRRELEVENT because they don't care one way or the other.

You are beyond belief! So every person who simply how don't like jumping into a flame post is irrelevent? I'm sure they all have the same high opinion of you [8|]

quote:

You can break down this entire thread in one point: "I hate Nates, I don't want to have to wait for Oscars to upgrade!"

quote:

They fielded what they could based on what they had. We have a grossly simplified model and people are neglecting the reality completely and saying lets just add this little interface toggle to let me do this because they are hung up on the interface mechanics of the game which has absolutely nothing to do with reality.

quote:

Of course, if the "silent majority" never speaks up then they will become the "irrelevant majority." I would imagine that if Matrix/2by3 publicly announces their willingness to consider changing the issue, more players will become involved.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Mr.Frag
The problem is most of the folks in this thread read a line in the editor and scream, but have yet to actually play the game far enough to even know that what they are talking about is completely pointless. [;)]

quote:

ORIGINAL: irrelevant

quote:

You can break down this entire thread in one point: "I hate Nates, I don't want to have to wait for Oscars to upgrade!"

This still is not quite it. It is more "Thank God I finally got all those crappy Nates upgraded to Oscar IIs. But wait; now the Oscar IIs are obsolete; I've got factories that could be cranking out Franks, too bad I can't upgrade any of my Oscars."

quote:

They fielded what they could based on what they had. We have a grossly simplified model and people are neglecting the reality completely and saying lets just add this little interface toggle to let me do this because they are hung up on the interface mechanics of the game which has absolutely nothing to do with reality.

I have to say, Frag, that this has convinced me that your arguement is correct.

quote:

Of course, if the "silent majority" never speaks up then they will become the "irrelevant majority." I would imagine that if Matrix/2by3 publicly announces their willingness to consider changing the issue, more players will become involved.

I consider myself to be the only true member of the "irrelevant majority"; the rest of you may apply for honorary status.[;)]

quote:

I consider myself to be the only true member of the "irrelevant majority"; the rest of you may apply for honorary status.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Oznoyng

quote:

ORIGINAL: Mr.Frag
The problem is most of the folks in this thread read a line in the editor and scream, but have yet to actually play the game far enough to even know that what they are talking about is completely pointless. [;)]

So there I am in a PBEM game late 44. I could have 1000 Franks produced - if there were anywhere to put them. So now I go, "WTF? I can't upgrade Oscars?" and post in the forum. The response I get: "Well, you can restart your game..." DO you have any idea how *idiotic* it is to suggest that we should spend 1000's of hours playing a game, THEN restart after it becomes an issue?

You can't have it both ways. You can't say on one hand - Japan didn't have the resources so they shouldn't and then also say that if they do, they can't anyway. If as you say, you can't produce them when the time comes, then it does not hurt to have the upgrade capability there. If you add the capability to upgrade and you manage to produce more advanced aircraft, not having the upgrade path *does* hurt the game.

quote:

The resource system is already in the game so, unless you are saying that the screwed the resource system, what i choose to squander my resources on is my business.

quote:

Have we heard that "on-the-fly" upgrades is even a "doable" change, yet?

quote:

ORIGINAL: Oznoyng

I could do it in my sleep. If they say they can't, it is more a question of "we don't want to" than "we can't".

quote:

ORIGINAL: Mr.Frag

quote:

Have we heard that "on-the-fly" upgrades is even a "doable" change, yet?

It is simply a memory location with a value stored in it ... I thought you were a coder. Write a TSR that sits on top of WitP and lets people change their aircraft at whim to anything.

If you want to get really fancy, you can even have it subtract and add the right numbers to the pool. Should take about an hour.

quote:

ORIGINAL: ZOOMIE1980

quote:

ORIGINAL: Mr.Frag

quote:

Have we heard that "on-the-fly" upgrades is even a "doable" change, yet?

It is simply a memory location with a value stored in it ... I thought you were a coder. Write a TSR that sits on top of WitP and lets people change their aircraft at whim to anything.

If you want to get really fancy, you can even have it subtract and add the right numbers to the pool. Should take about an hour.

I gave up on trying to figure out the low-level details of how this thing is put together a while ago. I know in general how it is done because I know how GG writes and those that know him professionally confirm that he hasn't changed very much over the years. But beyond that, I wouldn't know with any preciseness how anything really works....

And who does TSR's anymore? That's a DOS thingy.... We in the real world write Windows Services....

quote:

And who does TSR's anymore? That's a DOS thingy.... We in the real world write Windows Services....

quote:

But if you want a say so in a feature, speak up. If you don't until AFTER a decision gets made, you akin to the person who whines about their government representatives but never votes...

quote:

ORIGINAL: Mr.Frag

quote:

And who does TSR's anymore? That's a DOS thingy.... We in the real world write Windows Services....

That should be real amusing for the Windows 98 folks [8|]

quote:

ORIGINAL: Captain Cruft

I thought i was spelt D A E M O N [8|]

quote:

ORIGINAL: Mynok

quote:

But if you want a say so in a feature, speak up. If you don't until AFTER a decision gets made, you akin to the person who whines about their government representatives but never votes...

Hooey. In a condition of limited choice such as the US two-party system, often neither choice is acceptable. Choosing the "lesser" of two evils is stupid in a context as important as government. A citizen has every right to complain about his representative whether he/she voted or not. If anyone has forgone the right to complain, it is those who voted for the winning candidate. I don't buy that argument either, but it is the only one with any sort of logic behind.

And the concept somewhat applies to this thread as well. We don't know what the acceptable options are. Since 2by3 will define what those are, if any, it is equally pointless for us "irrelevants" to join in and say what others have already said.

To me, it seems the crux of the problem is that we don't know what is being modeled by the fixed-path upgrade system. If it is reflecting actual historical upgrades that occurred, then I would agree that it conflicts with the design teams choice to include the ability for non-historical production choices. If it is reflecting something else, then let us know what it is, so at least we can judge the effectiveness of the model. I could understand fixed-paths more if it applied to entire plane type, but it does not. What were the designers attempting to represent by that, because any reasonable person is going to infer that it is an arbitrary limitation by the designers to somehow handcuff the production system.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Mr.Frag
You can break down this entire thread in one point: "I hate Nates, I don't want to have to wait for Oscars to upgrade!"

quote:

ORIGINAL: Mr.Frag
If you want to go down this path, fine, I have no issue with it BUT I expect it to be done *right* with all the *real* inhibiters that *REALY* controlled Japan's outcome, not some little box that lets you pick any aircraft there was and just start researching it and magically get it before any of the preceeding aircraft that made it possible have been created.

quote:

ORIGINAL: von Beanie

Before I knew of this thread, I spent several hours tinkering with engine production and deciding which planes I wanted to research, making the changes as appropriate at the various factories. I also noted that some factories were already researching advanced models more than one year before they enter the game.

Then I started reading this thread and learned that even if I researched a higher quality plane type and moved its production up a year I could not use it because my squadrons would not accept it. Thus, I feel like I wasted a lot of time playing around with the research aspects of the game because there appears to be no real payoff. (It is also possible that I have misunderstood this thread because I am just starting my first Japanese campaign game).

I am willing to live with the current system, but then the research subsystem should be eliminated if it is essentially irrelevant to the game outcome (I would appreciate it someone could explain to me why I should spend hours tinkering with it?). Secondly, if I am supposed to produce a certain number of various planes in various years to fully equip my Japanese squadrons, PLEASE let me know in advance about how many of X types and Y types I will need in the various future years to do this properly so that I can try to create those numbers via the production system. I certainly don't want to waste another evening trying to figure out what plane types I will need to equip my squadrons in future years because it is a fixed part of the system design.

I am one of the quiet folk that believe either the research program should be eliminated OR it should work fully to the benefit of the player willing to make the effort. Personally, I vote for option #2 not because I am an Axis fanboy, but because I appreciate a good game design more than an exact recreation of historical events.

Best wishes, Norm

quote:

Before I knew of this thread, I spent several hours tinkering with engine production and deciding which planes I wanted to research, making the changes as appropriate at the various factories. I also noted that some factories were already researching advanced models more than one year before they enter the game.

Then I started reading this thread and learned that even if I researched a higher quality plane type and moved its production up a year I could not use it because my squadrons would not accept it. Thus, I feel like I wasted a lot of time playing around with the research aspects of the game because there appears to be no real payoff. (It is also possible that I have misunderstood this thread because I am just starting my first Japanese campaign game).

I am willing to live with the current system, but then the research subsystem should be eliminated if it is essentially irrelevant to the game outcome (I would appreciate it someone could explain to me why I should spend hours tinkering with it?). Secondly, if I am supposed to produce a certain number of various planes in various years to fully equip my Japanese squadrons, PLEASE let me know in advance about how many of X types and Y types I will need in the various future years to do this properly so that I can try to create those numbers via the production system. I certainly don't want to waste another evening trying to figure out what plane types I will need to equip my squadrons in future years because it is a fixed part of the system design.

I am one of the quiet folk that believe either the research program should be eliminated OR it should work fully to the benefit of the player willing to make the effort. Personally, I vote for option #2 not because I am an Axis fanboy, but because I appreciate a good game design more than an exact recreation of historical events.

Best wishes, Norm

quote:

ORIGINAL: von Beanie

Before I knew of this thread, I spent several hours tinkering with engine production and deciding which planes I wanted to research, making the changes as appropriate at the various factories. I also noted that some factories were already researching advanced models more than one year before they enter the game.

Then I started reading this thread and learned that even if I researched a higher quality plane type and moved its production up a year I could not use it because my squadrons would not accept it. Thus, I feel like I wasted a lot of time playing around with the research aspects of the game because there appears to be no real payoff. (It is also possible that I have misunderstood this thread because I am just starting my first Japanese campaign game).

I am willing to live with the current system, but then the research subsystem should be eliminated if it is essentially irrelevant to the game outcome (I would appreciate it someone could explain to me why I should spend hours tinkering with it?). Secondly, if I am supposed to produce a certain number of various planes in various years to fully equip my Japanese squadrons, PLEASE let me know in advance about how many of X types and Y types I will need in the various future years to do this properly so that I can try to create those numbers via the production system. I certainly don't want to waste another evening trying to figure out what plane types I will need to equip my squadrons in future years because it is a fixed part of the system design.

I am one of the quiet folk that believe either the research program should be eliminated OR it should work fully to the benefit of the player willing to make the effort. Personally, I vote for option #2 not because I am an Axis fanboy, but because I appreciate a good game design more than an exact recreation of historical events.

Best wishes, Norm

quote:

ORIGINAL: Oznoyng

quote:

ORIGINAL: von Beanie

Before I knew of this thread, I spent several hours tinkering with engine production and deciding which planes I wanted to research, making the changes as appropriate at the various factories. I also noted that some factories were already researching advanced models more than one year before they enter the game.

Then I started reading this thread and learned that even if I researched a higher quality plane type and moved its production up a year I could not use it because my squadrons would not accept it. Thus, I feel like I wasted a lot of time playing around with the research aspects of the game because there appears to be no real payoff. (It is also possible that I have misunderstood this thread because I am just starting my first Japanese campaign game).

I am willing to live with the current system, but then the research subsystem should be eliminated if it is essentially irrelevant to the game outcome (I would appreciate it someone could explain to me why I should spend hours tinkering with it?). Secondly, if I am supposed to produce a certain number of various planes in various years to fully equip my Japanese squadrons, PLEASE let me know in advance about how many of X types and Y types I will need in the various future years to do this properly so that I can try to create those numbers via the production system. I certainly don't want to waste another evening trying to figure out what plane types I will need to equip my squadrons in future years because it is a fixed part of the system design.

I am one of the quiet folk that believe either the research program should be eliminated OR it should work fully to the benefit of the player willing to make the effort. Personally, I vote for option #2 not because I am an Axis fanboy, but because I appreciate a good game design more than an exact recreation of historical events.

Best wishes, Norm

Sorry, Frag has led you a bit astray by polluting the topic of aircraft upgrades with the topic of aircraft research. My feelings on aircraft research aside (I would rather the game not have it at all), it remains useful. You do have to be careful with respect to how you use it.

Any aircraft that is an upgrade to another aircraft is a legitimate target for research. Aircraft that no aircraft upgrades to are not. If you succeed in getting the planes early, you have to await the reinforcement groups before you can use them. The P1Y Frances is an example of an aircraft you might not want to research. Nothing upgrades to it, so even if you get it early, you can't use it because the only airgroups that can use it are fixed in terms of their arrival dates.

On the other hand, you want to be careful about researching an aircraft like the Tony. While it has decent stats as a fighter, the total number of squadrons that can upgrade to it is small. If you take aircraft like the A6M8 or A7M, they are excellent choices for research because they are upgrades to very large numbers of fighters. Likewise, the Oscar is an decent choice for research because almost all Nate airgroups (over 1000 a/c) upgrade to it. Ditto the B7N. For a better discussion, see http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=664127 .

quote:

Sorry, Frag has led you a bit astray by polluting the topic of aircraft upgrades with the topic of aircraft research. My feelings on aircraft research aside (I would rather the game not have it at all), it remains useful. You do have to be careful with respect to how you use it.

Any aircraft that is an upgrade to another aircraft is a legitimate target for research. Aircraft that no aircraft upgrades to are not. If you succeed in getting the planes early, you have to await the reinforcement groups before you can use them. The P1Y Frances is an example of an aircraft you might not want to research. Nothing upgrades to it, so even if you get it early, you can't use it because the only airgroups that can use it are fixed in terms of their arrival dates.

On the other hand, you want to be careful about researching an aircraft like the Tony. While it has decent stats as a fighter, the total number of squadrons that can upgrade to it is small. If you take aircraft like the A6M8 or A7M, they are excellent choices for research because they are upgrades to very large numbers of fighters. Likewise, the Oscar is an decent choice for research because almost all Nate airgroups (over 1000 a/c) upgrade to it. Ditto the B7N.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Mr.Frag

Some basic numbers assuming you manage to not loose anything at all, the final picture of Japan's air force looks like this:

(these are groups - smaller squads were rounded into these)

50 A7M2 (fighter - 7/45)
34 Ki-43-IIa (fighter 1/43)
13 Ki-102a (fighter-bomber - 7/44)
12 Ki-84-Ic (fighter - 12/44)
12 Ki-100 (fighter - 2/45)
10 J7W (fighter - 8/45)
10 A6M5c (fighter bomber - 9/43)

You have 60 locations in the game that can be set to produce an aircraft of any type

There are 31 unique aircraft types (discounting upgrades that convert to a different type because they don't need to be double counted)

The 60 locations produce 1987 aircraft points (assuming you don't expand which when you look at your engine situation should be pretty clean why you can't)

Your engine capacity is 1521 (right off the bat you are way short on engine production)

Assuming you quit producing any two engine or four engine plane, you are short over 400 hundred engines. Realistically, you are short more like 900 engines because you will not quit making multi-engine aircraft.

If you think you are going to have spare aircraft laying around with nowhere to go, you are in a state of denial.